MANUFACTURING AND THE NII Summary of Comments Committee On Applications and Technology Information Infrastructure Task Force September 8, 1994 Mark Mandell National Institute of Standards and Technology Although the informal feedback on the white paper: Manufacturing and the NII, has been uniformly positive, there has been surprisingly little response in the way of formal, substantive comments. On the positive side, neither the content, structure, nor vision articulated in the paper has been called into question. On the negative side, there has been virtually no comment on or response to the questions and issues raised in the last section of the paper. Despite that fact, the comments received to date have been valuable in illuminating and reemphasizing some key issues. Generally, these comments focused on the need for us to pay more attention to the non- technical barriers to the implementation of NII applications to the manufacturing setting. For example, one respondent wrote: "The report does not adequately address cultural barriers to implementation which are major. . . . [M]uch of the infrastructure to use modeling and simulation for concurrent engineering exists and has for some time; yet a relatively small number of advanced companies are systematically putting the technology to use. Why not? The fact is that manufacturing is by nature very conservative and cautious with respect to change. There are many who believe in intuition and lessons from the past rather than technology guiding us into the future, and they do not put their trust in new paradigms until they become proven lessons." Dealing with cultural and organizational barriers to change and human factors is certainly necessary if the nation is to reach its goals in manufacturing, and the IITF needs to consider these issues more rigorously. As pointed out in another response, manufacturers "have little ambition to change" and are burdened by "economic baggage" in the form of legacy hardware and software systems, industrial "inertia," and the need to justify investments to the last penny. The result is that, "It takes a long time to impact manufacturing technology." Perhaps more to the point, another respondent highlighted the fact that the problem is getting smaller manufacturers to adopt what are considered to be today's "leading edge" technologies rather than do nothing or try to adopt "bleeding edge" technologies. NII pilot projects, therefore, should focus on demonstrating the real world impact of today's technology, for in short, "We can always demonstrate the technical leading edge; it is deployment to the mainstream that is critical in making fundamental change happen." One final theme in all of the comments received to date has been the need to focus better on education, training, and other work force issues, in particular ease of use. One respondent cited the need to make the "NII available to small companies with limited skills and resources . . . . providing standardized training programs for users staying away from the need for the specialist . . . [and] making sure that data output is user friendly and current as opposed to too much data too late." Another emphasized the need to provide "appropriate display technologies," "appropriate human-machine interfaces," and "easy-to-use applications," as well as the need to have in place adequately educated management (and management structures) and a skilled work force. Request for Additional Comments: Below are listed the eight "Issues and Questions to be Addressed" that were first posed in the Manufacturing and the NII white paper. We still believe that these are the "right" issues and questions to be addressed, but would like to take this opportunity to ask you if, in fact, we are looking at the important issues and are asking the right questions. Your responses will help us develop informed and effective policies that are in tune with your needs and concerns and in concert with your actions. o The continued modernization of manufacturing processes, in particular through incremental investment by small- and medium-sized manufacturers in appropriate manufacturing technologies, is fundamental to building a strong, competitive, sustainable industrial base in the U.S. Early indications show that programs such as the Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) and other state and local efforts are successful at helping manufactures make investments and adopt appropriate manufacturing technologies, including communications equipment and computer hardware and software applications for the NII. Should the federal government, building on the successes of the MEP, broaden the scope and reach of the MEP, turning it into a national program capable of assisting small- and medium-sized manufacturers throughout the U.S. in their preparation for the use NII for manufacturing? o In the new manufacturing paradigm, the factors that determine competitiveness -- flexibility, responsiveness, time-to-market, cost, and quality -- all depend on the efficient manipulation, control, management, and use of information. For this reason, information is a company's key strategic asset. While many companies want to modernize their equipment and processes, they often find difficulty in procuring, installing, and configuring new equipment to work with old equipment and in thinking about short-term investments in new equipment and capabilities in the context of a long-term, enterprise- wide investment strategy. To facilitate the investment process, should the Federal government increase the scope of the MEP to assist small- and medium-sized companies with their long-term strategic planning and investment decision-making activities? o Standards for product data exchange, electronic commerce, and interoperabilty are essential to the development and use of the NII in manufacturing. Currently, however, there is no generally accepted methodology or data format standards to allow easy exchange of data (both engineering and business) between U.S. companies within the same industry or across industries. In addition, information technology advances for manufacturing systems occur at very frequent intervals and there is concern that the standards development process as it is today cannot keep pace with the needs of the manufacturing industry. The federal government can accelerate the standards development and acceptance process by providing strong technical support for standards development and by demonstrating the soundness of technical ideas through rapid prototyping, demonstration of feasibility, and other implementation and validation activities. In which areas are the development and demonstration of the technical underpinnings of manufacturing-related standards for the NII most needed? Does continued federal investment product data standards (STEP), electronic commerce standards (EDI), and interoperabilty standards (OSE) make sense? Is there a need for an overarching standards framework that ensures that manufacturing applications for the NII are compatible? o The Committee on Civilian Industrial Technology (CIT) of the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) has identified several areas as critical to the manufacturing infrastructure. These areas include: Agile Manufacturing, Manufacturing Systems Integration, Manufacturing Technology Deployment, Intelligent Sensors and Controls, and Rapid Prototyping. In addition, the Committee on Information and Communications (CIC) of the NSTC oversees R&D for the Information Infrastructure more broadly. What are the specific technical requirements that industry needs to develop, implement, and use manufacturing applications for the NII? Which areas of R&D will stimulate the development and use of applications for the NII in manufacturing the fastest? What are the best candidates for federally sponsored demonstration projects and testbeds? Which federal agency or agencies should coordinate and lead the effort to build and test manufacturing applications for the NII? o While the federal government performs a great deal of R&D and provides demonstrations and testbeds, it is the private sector that turns the results of both public and private R&D into commercial products and processes. In the capital intensive, pre-production, latter stages of R&D, however, capital markets often find it difficult to properly assess the risk-return ratio (i.e., expected value) of further investment in product or process development and therefore often do not provide resources to test the commercial viability of high risk products and processes. To what extent is this a problem in manufacturing? Is there a government role in helping capital providers to accurately determine the risk-return ratio of investment in the latter stages of high risk product and processes development? o In the information age, a highly skilled, flexible, restrainable workforce is essential to economic competitiveness. The NII can be used to provide just-in-time, remote, tailored, multi-media education and training applications. (See, for example, "A Transformation of Learning: Use of the National Information Infrastructure for Education and Lifelong Learning"). The dynamic nature of the manufacturing sector necessitates the existence of adequate mechanisms for the identification of current and future trends and needs of U.S. manufacturers, assessment of the skills required to perform new tasks and use new manufacturing equipment, and development and delivery of focussed education and training programs directly to workers on the shop floor in a timely and effective manner. To what extent should the federal government play a role in developing mechanisms for the education and training the U.S. workforce to meet manufacturing needs? Should the federal government guarantee that all U.S. manufacturers, regardless of size, have access to adequate education and training resources? Which federal agency or agencies should be responsible for these activities? o For manufacturers to use the NII they must be assured that their transactions will be secure, timely, verifiable, and unaltered. To what extent is the safety, reliability, security, and maintenance of the NII a federal responsibility? .